The Academy’s Visual Effects Branch held its annual “Bake-Off” on Saturday, January 10th, to select the five nominees for the Best Visual Effects Oscar. For each of the ten films shortlisted for the category, four representatives presented 15-minute reels showcasing their work, including before-and-after footage, followed by Q&A sessions.
Background on the Bake-Off:
Since at least the late 1970s, the “Bake-Off” has been the make-or-break event for would-be Best Visual Effects Oscar contenders. Although the event was originally limited to presentations before a committee of Academy voters, beginning around 1993, the Bake-Off opened to the Academy at large and to members of the public, becoming an annual reunion of sorts for visual effects professionals. Until around 2020, only Academy members who attended the Bake-Off could vote for Best Visual Effects nominees. Voters would complete their nomination ballots immediately after the presentations concluded, ranking each presentation from 1 to 10.
This process helped protect against voters simply choosing their favorite film overall or those with the most “obvious” visual effects. It also meant that lesser-seen contenders with strong reels could land surprise nominations (e.g., “Hereafter,” “Deepwater Horizon”), while expected contenders with underwhelming presentations (such as “Tron: Legacy”) could miss out.
Other factors to consider include which VFX companies are represented among the four artists presenting each film. ILM has had more than 115 films make the Best Visual Effects shortlist over the years and has rarely gone a year without a nomination. Weta has also been a mainstay of Bake-Offs and nominations since the early 2000s. Both companies are well represented within the Visual Effects Branch.
Similarly, special effects supervisors appreciate films that showcase skillful use of practical effects. When the majority of reels focus on CGI, a well-placed practical showcase can linger in voters’ memories.
While being a Best Picture contender can help a film’s chances, it by no means guarantees a Best Visual Effects nomination. The only people voting for the nominees are visual effects professionals, and they will not nominate a film with middling effects work simply because they like the film overall. Several Best Picture nominees have participated in the Bake-Off in recent years but failed to secure a nomination (e.g., “Arrival,” “The Shape of Water,” “Black Panther,” “Mank,” “Poor Things“).
Thanks to COVID and the Academy’s international expansion, voters no longer need to be in the room to vote; they can watch the Bake-Off via livestream or review recordings later. Voting now occurs on the same timeline as other categories rather than on the day of the event, meaning voters may not vote until nearly a week after viewing the presentations. Additionally, this year, event moderators encouraged voters to vote only for films they had seen in their entirety, rather than nominating a film solely on the strength of a great reel.
Because of these changes, it is unclear whether Bake-Off presentations play as crucial a role as they once did in determining nominations. Still, the presentations undoubtedly remain an essential factor. I was unable to attend the Bake-Off this year; however, here is what I learned from those who did.
“Sinners”
Artists in Contention:
-
Michael Ralla, Visual Effects Supervisor (first time in the Bake-Off)
-
Espen Nordahl, Visual Effects Supervisor, Storm Studios (first time; also under consideration for “The Electric State”)
-
Guido Wolter, Visual Effects Supervisor, Rising Sun Pictures (first time)
-
Donnie Dean, Special Effects Coordinator (first time)
“Sinners” screened first because it was presented in 70mm, with the remaining films proceeding in alphabetical order.
The film featured more than 1,000 visual effects shots, though the team emphasized that in-camera practical work was used as a foundation throughout production. For example, during the “I Lied to You” number, Donnie Dean started a real fire on the ceiling of the main juke joint set, later augmented by VFX. Similarly, while CGI was used to depict vampires bursting into flames, the makeup team laid the groundwork with prosthetics.
The team also highlighted the challenges of creating twin versions of Michael B. Jordan. Traditional split-screen techniques were insufficient due to the frequent physical interaction between the characters. A halo rig was used to capture Jordan’s entire head, allowing his performance to replace that of stunt doubles.
Shooting with IMAX cameras and on 70mm film presented additional challenges, requiring specially designed Steadicam rigs.
“Avatar: Fire and Ash”
Artists in Contention:
-
Joe Letteri, Senior Visual Effects Supervisor, Weta FX (15th time; 11 nominations, 5 wins)
-
Richard Baneham, Visual Effects Supervisor, Weta FX (4th time; 2 nominations, 2 wins)
-
Eric Saindon, Senior Visual Effects Supervisor, Weta FX (7th time; 3 nominations, 1 win)
-
Daniel Barrett, Senior Animation Supervisor, Weta FX (5th time; 4 nominations, 1 win)
The reel was screened in 3D at 120 FPS. The team discussed the challenges of creating realistic fire effects and differentiating fire sources, as well as animating the Ash village, which required immense detail. James Cameron requested the team rely on reference footage he shot himself in Vanuatu.
They also addressed ongoing challenges with underwater motion capture and the increased complexity of Spider’s role, which required seamless interaction with CGI characters. Oona Chaplin’s performance as Varang demanded particularly detailed facial and body capture. New alien species, including a tentacled creature appearing in the final battle, were also introduced.
“The Electric State”
Artists in Contention:
-
Matthew Butler, Visual Effects Supervisor, Digital Domain (seventh time in the Bake-Off; nominated twice)
-
Joel Behrens, Visual Effects Supervisor, Digital Domain (first time)
-
Russell Earl, Visual Effects Supervisor, ILM (tenth time; nominated six times)
-
Espen Nordahl, Visual Effects Supervisor, Digital Domain (first time; also under consideration for “Sinners”)
This presentation showcased the enormous variety of robot designs created for the film. Each robot had a unique function, number of limbs, and movement style, meaning visual effects elements could not be reused between designs.
Motion-capture performances relied heavily on practical references. In some cases, voice actors such as Hank Azaria were hired after motion capture had already been completed, requiring the team to rework the robots’ movements and behaviors to incorporate the actors’ physical performances recorded later.
“F1”
Artists in Contention:
-
Ryan Tudhope, Visual Effects Supervisor, Framestore (second time; nominated once)
-
Nicolas Chevallier, Visual Effects Supervisor, Framestore (first time)
-
Robert Harrington, Visual Effects Supervisor, Framestore (first time)
-
Keith Dawson, Special Effects Supervisor (first time)
Although “F1” featured extensive real racing footage, it still included approximately 2,500 visual effects shots. The before-and-after reel highlighted the film’s many invisible effects. For safety reasons, rain sequences were often shot in clear weather, with the VFX team later transforming skies, ground conditions, and adding digital water spray from the tires.
Practical work was still heavily utilized. Cars flying through the air were filmed using specially designed ramps. Each vehicle and real-world track environment was scanned to allow seamless CGI recreation when necessary.
“Frankenstein”
Artists in Contention:
-
Dennis Berardi, Visual Effects Supervisor, Mr. X (third time)
-
Ayo Burgess, Visual Effects Supervisor, Mr. X (first time)
-
Ivan Busquets, Visual Effects Supervisor, ILM (first time)
-
José Granell, Model Unit Producer and Model Effects Supervisor (first time)
The “Frankenstein” team emphasized that no generative AI was used and that much of the work relied on practical effects and miniatures.
Multiple versions of Frankenstein’s tower were built at different scales and captured using old-school trick photography before the miniatures were physically destroyed. The tower’s first floor was a full-scale built set for exterior shots.
The ship was also a built set mounted on a gimbal to allow it to rock when pushed by the creature. Despite the emphasis on practical effects, the film still featured roughly 1,200 VFX shots. The presentation highlighted ILM’s CGI wolves and deer, as well as the “Shot of Life,” which depicts the interior of a heart using real medical photography as reference.
“Jurassic World: Rebirth”
Artists in Contention:
-
David Vickery, Visual Effects Supervisor, ILM (fifth time; nominated once)
-
Stephen Aplin, Animation Supervisor, ILM (first time)
-
Charmaine Chan, Visual Effects Supervisor, ILM (first time)
-
Neil Corbould, Special Effects Supervisor (17th time; eight nominations, two wins)
No “Jurassic Park” film has ever failed to qualify for the Best Visual Effects Bake-Off, though none has secured a nomination since 1997’s “The Lost World.” This time, the team focused less on dinosaurs and more on invisible effects, such as fully digital capuchin monkeys and the inflatable raft sequence near the T. rex.
Large water tanks were built for boats mounted on gimbals, though many water sequences used little or no water on set, with digital water added later. The T. rex raft chase included real water and was partially shot in the UK, where actors wore wetsuits that were digitally removed due to cold conditions.
This was one of two reels that received audible “wows” from the audience for its invisible effects.
“The Lost Bus”
Artists in Contention:
-
Charlie Noble, Visual Effects Supervisor (fourth time; nominated once)
-
David Zaretti, Visual Effects Supervisor, ILM (first time)
-
Russell Bowen, Visual Effects Supervisor, beloFX (first time)
-
Brandon K. McLaughlin, Special Effects Coordinator (first time)
The team demonstrated that “Avatar: Fire and Ash” did not have a monopoly on fire effects. Extensive research into the Paradise Fire informed the scale and movement of the flames.
Clean-burning propane was used for on-set fire, meaning embers had to be added digitally. Additional smoke layers were composited, and large wind machines were used to create firestorm conditions. Paul Greengrass’s preference for long takes required the digital removal of crew and equipment.
This was the other reel that earned audible audience reactions.
“Superman”
Artists in Contention:
-
Stéphane Ceretti, Visual Effects Supervisor (seventh time; nominated three times)
-
Guy Williams, Visual Effects Supervisor, Weta FX (eighth time; nominated four times)
-
Enrico Damm, Visual Effects Supervisor, ILM (first time)
-
Stéphane Nazé, Visual Effects Supervisor, Framestore (second time)
The presentation focused heavily on Krypto the Superdog. While fully CGI, Krypto was animated using James Gunn’s own dog as reference, with a human motion-capture stand-in on set (including moments where an actor physically pulled Superman’s cape with his teeth).
The team discussed flight sequences, some of which were shot using Volume technology rather than traditional CGI. Gaussian splatting was used to portray Superman’s Kryptonian parents, requiring a 192-camera setup.
Challenges included animating nanites, ultimately treated like ants rather than liquid, and creating the Fortress of Solitude, whose complex crystal structures took weeks to render. The Kaiju sequence was also highlighted, with Gunn pushing for faster movement than initially planned.
“Tron: Ares”
Artists in Contention:
-
David Seager, Visual Effects Supervisor, ILM (first time)
-
Jeff Capogreco, Visual Effects Supervisor, ILM (second time)
-
Vincent Papaix, Visual Effects Supervisor, ILM (second time)
-
Cameron Waldbauer, Special Effects Coordinator (fourth time; nominated twice)
The “Tron” franchise has a mixed Bake-Off history. In 1982, Richard Taylor’s presentation received little engagement, while in 2010, “Tron: Legacy” focused heavily on Jeff Bridges’ de-aging and ultimately missed a nomination.
“Tron: Ares” paid homage to both entries, requiring the creation of three distinct Grids: the modern Dillinger Grid, the ENCOM Grid from “Legacy,” and a retro 1982 Flynn Grid. Visual continuity with “Legacy” was carefully maintained, while the retro grid incorporated grain and period textures.
Practical effects played a major role. Light cycles were practical builds with LEDs, and a police car was genuinely split in half on a bridge. Wide shots utilized a CGI city modeled after Vancouver.
“Wicked: For Good”
Artists in Contention:
-
Pablo Helman, Visual Effects Supervisor, ILM (eighth time; nominated four times)
-
Jonathan Fawkner, Visual Effects Supervisor, Framestore (fifth time; nominated four times)
-
Dale Newton, Animation Supervisor, Framestore (first time)
-
Paul Corbould, Special Effects Supervisor (11th time; nominated three times)
An engaging Q&A can help nomination chances, and “Wicked: For Good” earned the biggest laughs of the day.
The film’s two new songs, “No Place Like Home” and “Girl in the Bubble,” posed unique challenges. The former required convincingly animated talking animals, while the latter featured a three-minute “one-shot” sequence using mirrors and stitched-together shots. Filmed in 2022, the sequence took three years to complete.
New challenges included the Oz tornado and the introduction of the Tin Man and Cowardly Lion, both modeled closely on original book illustrations. Extensive practical effects were again employed, including a 20-foot-tall roller coaster rig for Glinda and Elphaba’s floating sequence, complemented by digital set extensions.
One voter who disliked the effects in the first film noted that this installment was an improvement.
The Consensus
There is broad agreement that “Avatar: Fire and Ash” will be nominated, with “F1” and “Superman” also widely assumed to be in. The final two slots remain competitive.
“The Lost Bus” is considered very much in play, though not a lock. “Wicked” was nominated previously, making “Wicked: For Good” a reasonable contender, even if the sequel is viewed as a lesser awards player.
Among likely Best Picture contenders, “Sinners” and “Frankenstein” benefit from overall popularity, though that alone is not decisive. “Frankenstein” earns praise for its miniatures and old-school techniques, but some voters cited concerns about the CGI animal animation.
We have previously written about the bake-off process, its history, and trends to keep an eye on here.
What do you think is going to be nominated for Best Visual Effects at this year’s Academy Awards? Please let us know in the comments section below and on Next Best Picture’s X account, click here for the most recent tally of awards season winners, here for Next Best Picture’s precursor tracker, and here for their current Oscar predictions.
